The clitorides voting is open until the end of April. Vote for your favourites [ X Dismiss ]
Home « Forum « Author Hangout

Forum: Author Hangout

Book Section Question

Crumbly Writer

I hate webpages that list quotes without any sources or even attempts at authentication, so I've been trying to source each of my epigraphs (quotes used at the top of each chapter). The problem is, I've been listed the sources in a Bibliography, which is technically a list of an author's works, not a sources list.

Does anyone know the correct book terminology for a list of sources, other than a 'Footnotes Page'? My own personal library isn't extensive enough to list any, as too few book bother sources their ... sources.

Replies:   REP  Dominions Son
zellus

Reference list!?!

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer

@zellus

Reference list!?!

That's so generic, I might as well simply title it "Appendix" and be done with it. I was hoping to find a specific book term, as I'm sure I'm not the only author who's even wanted to include this type of thing in a book before.

As of now, I still think that "Bibliography" is the most apt term I've heard (since it lists the books I'm referencing in my stories).

Replies:   Switch Blayde
Switch Blayde

@Crumbly Writer

Wikipedia has guidelines for citing within Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources

They say to put the reference in a footnote.

This is the MLA Guide's rules for citing (as described by OWL (Purdue University On-Line Workshop)). I didn't try to understand what it says.

Or you could simply have the citation following the quote, as in:

Chapter 1
"xxxxxxxx"
— William Shakespear

or

— William Shakespear, Hamlet, p. 10

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer
Updated:

@Switch Blayde

Unfortunately, Switch, most authors follow your 'option A', which means their attributes are often completely wrong, or feature modified quotes or worse, 'requoted quotes' (i.e. quotes which are attributed to those who simply regurgitate what they read as youths).

When trying to 'authenticate' my quotes, many of the sources end up being fairly lengthy, especially if you have to highlight misattributions or modifications of an original quote, so you really can't add it to the tail end of a quote without providing a link to a specific webpage.

I prefer providing the original quote, along with a simple attribution, but offer the sources for anyone interested at the back of the book. Hopefully, that way, I won't continue to contribute to the 'passing off' of worthless information on the net.

I can't tell you the sheer number of 'quote books' which don't authenticate a single quote!

Also, SOL provides no mechanisms for including footnotes, other than at the end of each chapter, and no one is ever going to stop reading, to jump to the end of the chapter, and then search through the entire chapter trying to find where they were. That's simply an unworkable solution. (Sorry for venting, but we've had these 'footnote' discussions before, which never actually found any sort of consensus.)

That said, adding specific footnotes, which link to the Bibliography in my ebooks, makes sense. As it is, I'm adding a footnote "*" to any quotation which differs from what's commonly associated with a particular author, to show that the common claims are disputed.

Also, don't forget that there's a world of difference between how non-fiction and fiction works handle similar situations. Most non-fiction works routinely use end-of-chapter footnotes, so it' makes perfect sense to do the same with quotes, whereas it merely impedes the flow of a story in fiction.

* Again, story about continuing to rant, but I'm hoping for solutions, rather than mere continuances to the existing problems I'm facing.

Ernest Bywater

I use the process of:

quoted text
attribution.

so you can get

Do what you do do well
Do what you do do well boy
Do what you do do well
Give your love and all of your heart
And do what you do do well

Ned Miller, 1965

or

May you live in interesting times.
Apocryphal Chinese curse.

However, if you wish to include information on where you researched the quotes you may wish to add an Author's Note as a separate sub-chapter at the end or start where you list the chapter, quote, attribution, and where you found it.

I often include an Author's Note with auxiliary information to explain some oddity for the reader, such as at the start of Times of Old and Boone.

Ross at Play
Updated:

SORRY, I accidentally edited and entirely replaced what I originally posted here.

That post suggested CMOS 14.59 seems to allow authors to design their own style of bibliography, but stresses the title should indicate that and the author should explain what they have done.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer
Updated:

@Ross at Play


I looked at CMOS but couldn't figure out the answer. The relevant sections I found were:

14.59 Kinds of bibliographies

15.10 Function and placement of reference lists


Thanks, Ross. That's helpful.

In my own books, I've consistently renamed my own bibliography section as "Other Books by the Author", so renaming "Reference Notes" as "Bibliography" isn't a stretch (as, presumably, my readers will expect that it's not a standard bibliography).

Following the idea which Switch's comments generated (about including footnote links to my (Epigraph) Bibliography) would, in itself, explain the role of the Bibliography (as no one else would ever likely encounter it, since it's buried in the back of the book). But I gave up on 'section explanations' after continually providing my own 'disclaimer' on my Character List sections, explain how to use a character list. In short, it never helped, it never got readers to use the section properly, and it only stated the obvious.

How about if I create an entirely new term: Epigraphography? :D

REP

@Crumbly Writer

You could go with 'Citations Page'.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer

@REP

You could go with 'Citations Page'.

Now that's an Excellent suggestion! It's much more precise and instantly recognized than my vaguely misused "Bibliography" terminology.

I officially owe you one (feel free to remind me the next time we lock heads). Consider it a 'free pass' for at least one argument. 'D

Replies:   Ross at Play  REP
Ross at Play
Updated:

DAMN. I tried to quote from an earlier post I made but accidentally edited, and replaced, that entire post.

This is what I intended to post here.

I think the correct terminology for that would be a "reference list".

I now think that was wrong. Upon further inspection, I think a "reference list" is the type of bibliography used when the text includes citations, ie with author's name and years shown in brackets after quotes, then full details in the reference list at the end.

That suggests the correct terminology for what CW wants is a "Select Bibliography". CMOS describes those in 14.59 as follows:

2. Selected bibliography If, for whatever reason, the author does not wish to list all works cited, the title must so indicate: either Select Bibliography or (less frequently) Select Bibliography, if the list is quite short, Suggested Readings or Further Readings. A headnote should explain the principles of selection.

Ross at Play

@Crumbly Writer

@REP
You could go with 'Citations Page'.
@CW
Now that's an Excellent suggestion! It's much more precise

I agree that 'citations' is the best word, but I'd call what you have a 'list' rather than a 'page'.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer

@Ross at Play

I agree that 'citations' is the best word, but I'd call what you have a 'list' rather than a 'page'.

For my uses, I think I'll simply use "Citations", without specifying what it consists of. After all, I'm not titling my "Copyright" or my "Acknowledgments" pages as "Contents Page" and "Acknowledgments List". The shorter title makes it easier to manage too.

Now, I've got several books to update! 'D

Dominions Son

@Crumbly Writer

'Footnotes Page'?


On separate pages at the end, that would be end notes, not foot notes.

Does anyone know the correct book terminology for a list of sources.


Bibliography.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer

@Dominions Son

Does anyone know the correct book terminology for a list of sources.

Bibliography.

And here we are again, having successfully completed a full circle.

By the way, a "bibliography" is technically a list of an author's complete works, just like a discography is a listing of a musician's complete recordings, but I agree that it sounds like a more natural choice.

Given everything already discussed, I think I'll go with "Citations", although "Bibliography" looks much better on the printed (and non-printed) page. However, Switch's suggestion largely avoids the entire issue, because once I add in live-links to my ebooks, no one will ever have to worry about what it's called. If they're curious about a quote, they can simply click on the attribution and jump right to it without worrying about where to find it. For my print books, they still have to leaf to the end of the book, just as they do now.

But, of course, really no one CARES about this but me, so this is essentially just a hell-of-a-lot of effort with ZERO return, but it makes me feel like more of a professional, so what the hell! It ain't costing me nothing but time.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Crumbly Writer

By the way, a "bibliography" is technically a list of an author's complete works,


The term is also used in academic writing to refer to a list of cited works at the end of a scholarly article/research paper.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliography

An enumerative bibliography is a systematic list of books and other works such as journal articles. Bibliographies range from "works cited" lists at the end of books and articles, to complete and independent publications.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
REP

@Crumbly Writer

Consider it a 'free pass' for at least one argument. 'D


Nah, I like to exchange viewpoints to much. I usually learn a lot by exchanging ideas, even if I don't totally agree with what the other person is saying. Although I don't argue just to argue.

richardshagrin

@REP

I like to exchange viewpoints to much.

Who is Much? I don't recognize the name as someone you exchange viewpoints with. Perhaps you like to exchange viewpoints too much?

I apologize in advance for proof-reading your forum post. Sometimes I am for-um and sometimes against-um.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater  REP
Ernest Bywater

@richardshagrin

Who is Much?


He's the Miller's son.

Crumbly Writer

@Dominions Son

By the way, a "bibliography" is technically a list of an author's complete works,

The term is also used in academic writing to refer to a list of cited works at the end of a scholarly article/research paper.

Which is why I initially (for 3 or 4 books) used "Bibliography", but then I started having second thoughts. As I stated earlier, I prefer Bibliography, as it looks 'cleaner', cut "Citations" is probably a more precise term, since this isn't a list of resources used, but merely a list of Cited quotations. But, as I also previously mentioned, providing direct links (at least in my ebooks) save readers from worrying about what it's called, as they can jump directly to the source material.

REP

@richardshagrin

Humor is always welcome. :)

Ross at Play
Updated:

@REP

@CW
Consider it a 'free pass' for at least one argument. 'D

@REP
Nah, I like to exchange viewpoints to much.

Why don't you try to auction off your free pass? I'm sure there'd be plenty of interested buyers. :-)

Back to Top